PDA

View Full Version : EF 17-80 2.8L IS?


col4bin
9th of November 2006 (Thu), 10:46
Heard from a good source that this lens will be released in February. I think it is an update to a lens that was taken out of production.

Also heard MSRP is about $1,600 but should retail in the $1,300's

farrukh
9th of November 2006 (Thu), 14:35
Its possible to make such lens but impossible to carry without a crane or similar support.
You heard about EF-S (crop) lens i think.

SoaringUSAEagle
11th of November 2006 (Sat), 08:34
That'd be an addition to my bag in a heart beat.

D113
11th of November 2006 (Sat), 14:29
Shize! I'd sell my 24-70L and forget about buying the 16-35L at that point... unless I wanted an extra mm on the wide end.

This sounds like it wouldn't be a wise canon move.

Tom W
11th of November 2006 (Sat), 15:33
If this is to pass, I'd really want to see what the lens can do before plucking down any money. That's a difficult design, going from ultra-wide to short tele, especially with a fast aperture. I would expect less performance compared to the 24-70.

col4bin
11th of November 2006 (Sat), 17:01
FWIW, my source was told about this lens at the Photo Expo in NYC a week ago by a Canon rep. They even saw it in printed literature.

I hope this happens. I was going to pick up the 16-35 but if this lens actually pans out and is good, I will sell my 24-105L and replace it with a 17-80 2.8L and cover two needs with one lens.

coreypolis
11th of November 2006 (Sat), 17:06
so a lens lens with twice the range and IS will replace the 16-35 for the same price? highly doubtful. if it is introduced, I'd be willing to bet a price tag of atleast double the stated price

col4bin
11th of November 2006 (Sat), 17:08
Well, this is the rumor forum....so one can dream a bit too.

Billginthekeys
12th of November 2006 (Sun), 19:55
if this thing happens and is smaller than my 300 2.8 i might pick it up. but seriously, 17-80 2.8 with IS... that thing would have to be massive if they made it. that said if they could pull such a lens off i would kiss my 17-40 and 24-105 goodbye.

canoflan
17th of November 2006 (Fri), 08:43
FWIW, my source was told about this lens at the Photo Expo in NYC a week ago by a Canon rep. They even saw it in printed literature.

I hope this happens. I was going to pick up the 16-35 but if this lens actually pans out and is good, I will sell my 24-105L and replace it with a 17-80 2.8L and cover two needs with one lens.

This is what I want to address. If this is printed by Canon, then someone on the web that is really in tune with future releases, but wants the world to know, has scanned the catalog page and put it on the web in pdf or pic format. I will check, however, rumors are just what we want them to be; however, trying to communicate what we think really will happen is another beast all together. I will report back...:confused:

Darkhamr
17th of November 2006 (Fri), 09:07
I'm quite new to photography and admittedly don't know Canon history well, but since I've been reviewing and planning my long-term lens purchases for quite awhile, I'd say this is not in Canon's best interest even if possible.

First without being pushed to create this by competition, this would appear to me to make a number of other Canon lenses nearly obsolete. In other words, lost revenue. And if they did I can't see it so reasonably priced. Second, wouldn't this require either solving a lot of prior design limitations all at once or comprimising quality big time?

MrChad
24th of November 2006 (Fri), 09:01
I'm quite new to photography and admittedly don't know Canon history well, but since I've been reviewing and planning my long-term lens purchases for quite awhile, I'd say this is not in Canon's best interest even if possible.

First without being pushed to create this by competition, this would appear to me to make a number of other Canon lenses nearly obsolete. In other words, lost revenue. And if they did I can't see it so reasonably priced. Second, wouldn't this require either solving a lot of prior design limitations all at once or comprimising quality big time?

from other lens designs on the market, like the Sigma 17-70mm. It would seem logical to me that this lens might be more feasable as an 17-80, or rather 18-70, f/4 IS EF-S.

Everyone shooting canon would own the 8 lbs. 17-80mm EF :)

aliflack
26th of November 2006 (Sun), 10:52
Nah, I don't buy this rumour for a minute.

Too much overlap with the EF-S 17-55 for consumers and I'd be amazed to see Canon effectively merge and upgrade both the 16-35 and 24-70. Much more likely would be an updated 24-70 offering IS...

...but hey, I've never talked to a Canon rep so, what do I know!

BradT0517
26th of November 2006 (Sun), 20:16
I dont see why it should be 80 I think it should be 70 so It mixes better with the 70-200 2.8 IS

joegolf68
26th of November 2006 (Sun), 20:27
Not gonna happen. As figured out here in a couple of minutes, if it is an awesome lens, the downside to Canon is they put several of there other lenses at risk.

ScottE
28th of November 2006 (Tue), 23:17
Canon make a 24-70 f/2.8 and 24-105 f/4 in an EF mount.

A 17-55 f/2.8 and 17-75 f/4 would make comparable companions in an EF-S mount.

chobits
29th of November 2006 (Wed), 03:15
I do hope this lens will be released on Feb for real.

aliflack
29th of November 2006 (Wed), 06:35
Canon make a 24-70 f/2.8 and 24-105 f/4 in an EF mount.

A 17-55 f/2.8 and 17-75 f/4 would make comparable companions in an EF-S mount.

good point - but we already have the EF-s 17-85 IS so I presume canon would look to either replace it or 'upgrade' it to offer fixed F4 throughout the zoom range and/or whack in the newest gen IS...

chobits
3rd of December 2006 (Sun), 00:23
is it possible to confirm if this lens is real or not?
if it is true, i'll wait for this one instead of buying 24-70mm L

MrChad
3rd of December 2006 (Sun), 07:42
is it possible to confirm if this lens is real or not?
if it is true, i'll wait for this one instead of buying 24-70mm L

No way of confirming I would highly doubt this however since we have the 24-70L and the 17-55mm f/2.8 EF-S.

I'd say buy one of those now, the 24-70L has a nice rebate going for it. If a new lens should tempt you come Feb. You could always sell you L and likely recoupe the cost.

ipacmm
3rd of December 2006 (Sun), 18:34
If canon came out with this lens, I couldn't see it as an L lens, since it really would hurt the market for the 16-35, 17-40, 24-70 and 24-105mm markets which is a big market for one lens to take over.

motion_projekt
8th of December 2006 (Fri), 11:54
If canon came out with this lens, I couldn't see it as an L lens, since it really would hurt the market for the 16-35, 17-40, 24-70 and 24-105mm markets which is a big market for one lens to take over.

well if they jack the price up ridiculously high i think it might not hurt. For one, if its super duper expensive, people might be like..."Nah, i not goin by 'em" and boom! that leaves the door open for consumers to buy the other aforementioned lenses. With that said, if someone does buy it at the ridiculously high price, then canon wins cause they just got 10 bajillion dollars for a 10 lbs. lens. I mean shoot...they have hte 24-70L and teh 24-105L (granted that there are differences between the 2 lenses...but still they are similar.)

Just my $0.02...excuse the pidgin...my hawaii habits are hard to break.

shoots den brah. take it easy. lol

canoflan
20th of December 2006 (Wed), 16:14
Heard from a good source that this lens will be released in February. I think it is an update to a lens that was taken out of production.

Also heard MSRP is about $1,600 but should retail in the $1,300's

I think I heard my sister's brother tell me that his dad's wife was in the line to get this lens from her son for around $1,150 in March 2007.:confused:

BradT0517
20th of December 2006 (Wed), 16:33
I think I heard my sister's brother tell me that his dad's wife was in the line to get this lens from her son for around $1,150 in March 2007.:confused:

So Im not sure about the make up of your family but it sounds like your getting one:lol:

jcw122
26th of December 2006 (Tue), 21:34
The high price kills it. Always does.

Mikelangelo
3rd of January 2007 (Wed), 18:58
17-80 2.8 L... even EF-S... I'd definitely bite for a piece of that. Sell my Tamron 28-75 2.8 (which I LOVE) for that kinda' action! I don't mind a smidge of overlap with 70-200... those two lenses alone would be a marvelous 1-2 punch for me.

However, I agree with much of the sentiments here... not too likely... but I can always hope. While I'm at it, I hope the list price is < $1k. ;)

jcw122
3rd of January 2007 (Wed), 19:05
I'd hope for street price (after settling) to get down to $600 or $700...anything higher, I just can't do.

It would be one hell of a lens though, and if it came out, I'd say it would be EF-S.

Billginthekeys
5th of January 2007 (Fri), 20:36
I'd hope for street price (after settling) to get down to $600 or $700...anything higher, I just can't do.

It would be one hell of a lens though, and if it came out, I'd say it would be EF-S.
i wouldnt bet your life on that price. but its dreaming that this lens will even exist in this reality :lol:. so feel free to dream on :D

Rokkorfan
13th of January 2007 (Sat), 19:02
I'd hope for street price (after settling) to get down to $600 or $700...anything higher, I just can't do.



If this is actually true (which is doubt) it would list with a price of $1600-$2000, and would settle to a price of not less than $1500. In any event, such a lens would need to be big complicated and heavy, or else it would sacrifice image quality. Just look at the 24-70 for starters, and then imagine trying to add the most difficult to correct focal lengths (ie. super-wide angle) to it.

I think that there is NO CHANCE of this lens being released in an EF mount.

motion_projekt
18th of January 2007 (Thu), 05:12
hmm...i was just thinking of what a fatty this lens would be.

one heckuva bombucha lens.